Judicial Reform

As structured in the Constitution, the federal government consists of three components: the executive branch, the legislative branch, and the judicial branch. While most focus primarily on the executive and legislative branches, the judiciary is just as important and casts an expanding shadow over policy debates. With its own set of institutions and opacity, most Americans have only a vague understanding of the legal system and its impact on the economy. As the size and scope of government has grown, the legal system has lost its moorings, with common law being overwhelmed by statutory law—drowning the economy in red tape.

Hold Congress Accountable

Knowledge is power. It makes sure people understand what is happening to their country, and how they can make a difference. FreedomWorks University will give you the tools to understand economics, the workings of government, the history of the American legal system, and the most important debates facing our nation today. Enroll in FreedomWorks University today!

The Federal Circuit is unique among the courts of appeals as it is the only court that has its jurisdiction based wholly upon subject matter rather than geographic location. The Federal Circuit Court hears certain appeals from all of the United States District Courts, appeals from certain administrative agencies, and appeals arising under certain statutes.

Much of the Bill of Rights is dedicated to protecting accused persons, an action integral to our society. Expanding upon the Sixth Amendment’s granted right to legal counsel, states have put legislation in place that strictly dictates who can practice law. While such regulations aim to protect citizens, they have adverse effects and actually abridge the freedoms we hold dear.

Sometimes a court reaches a decision that is great on the policy side, but appears to lack a basis in the law. Last week, in Comptroller v. Wynne, the Supreme Court made such a decision, continuing its practice of reading a negative Commerce Clause into our Constitution.

Normally to sue in federal court, a plaintiff must establish standing. There are three requirements for establishing standing: (1) an injury in fact, (2) a causal relationship between the injury and the defendant’s conduct, and (3) the injury would be redressed by a favorable court ruling.

The Necessary and Proper Clause is often called the “Elastic Clause” because it is believed to give Congress “implied powers” that government is assumed to possess without being mentioned in the Constitution. There is a problem with this view: a government that is able to expand its power through an “Elastic Clause” is more likely to abuse its power.

It has been assumed that once the Supreme Court issues a decision, the other courts in this country are bound to follow the decision for all future cases that fall within the announced rule. However, it can be argued that in most circumstances, neither the Constitution nor federal law requires other courts to follow the Supreme Court. Indeed, it has been the Supreme Court itself that has demanded that their decision be binding on future cases. This seems to be the type of usurpation of power is the type our Founders detested and the Constitution was meant to prohibit.

Today you need hours of training and a license to do a countless number of jobs throughout the United States. These requirements cover jobs that are not only highly-skilled, potentially dangerous professions like medical surgeons, but also pet groomers, interior designers, florists and hair braiding.

Is the government able to require that you hand over a portion of your production to be able to enter a regulated marketplace? That is the main question in Horne v. Department of Agriculture, a case that was argued before the Supreme Court on Wednesday.

A group of states and energy companies have joined to sue the EPA over the agency’s Clean Power Plan. The two cases, State of West Virginia v. EPA and In re Murray Energy Company, were combined and oral arguments were heard before the DC Circuit this Thursday.